• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Government intrusion

Government Intrusion

  • Too much government

    Votes: 10 90.9%
  • Not enough government

    Votes: 1 9.1%
  • Not enough government

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    11

digsbe

Truth will set you free
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
May 13, 2009
Messages
20,224
Reaction score
14,223
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
What's the discussion? In certain areas I think we need more government, and in others I think we need less. It's finding a balance that is key, and each area has a different balance.
 

phattonez

Traditionalist
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 3, 2009
Messages
30,552
Reaction score
4,221
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Waffles and breadcrumbs! Butter and gingersnaps! Maybe corn, but then oatmeal?! Peaches.
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
248,563
Reaction score
74,593
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
I'd love to know where people think we don't have ENOUGH government. We have too much government in every area-the issue is which areas have the worst overregulation
 

earthworm

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 21, 2005
Messages
5,728
Reaction score
904
Location
Goldsboro,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
I'd love to know where people think we don't have ENOUGH government. We have too much government in every area-the issue is which areas have the worst overregulation
Then, Dude, exactly where would you cut a regulation.
But, I do agree that all of us, not only government, overreact.
We need a better people, until that time we will have to sludge ahead; but its a poor idea to fall back.
I'm in the process of trying to buy a house, you would not believe the volume of paperwork created by the lawyers to protect people from asbestos, termites, mercury,lead, and themselves.
 

obvious Child

Equal Opportunity Hater
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
19,883
Reaction score
5,120
Location
0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
I'd love to know where people think we don't have ENOUGH government. We have too much government in every area-the issue is which areas have the worst overregulation
Easy. Food. The FDA does not have the authority to force a company to recall tainted food or even publicly announce without the company's permission. The government can force a company to take back a dangerous non-food product and announce that publicly, but a food producer, like the big egg farm that tainted hundreds of millions of eggs with salmonella last month has the right to ignore the FDA and sell potentially lethal food products. The only real thing the FDA can do is pull its inspectors, effectively shutting down a plant. That does not stop the containmented food products that have already been shipped from being sold.

The fact that the government can make a company recall slightly defective cribs that may accidentally kill 1 infant out of 1 million but cannot force a recall of food which can (and has) sickened and killed millions and hundreds is frightening. I want the FDA to have the power to force food producers to recall e-coli laced meat. Especially consider the type of e-coli out there. The kind that produces shiga toxins which literally liquefy your organs.

But maybe you like Americans dying horrific and entirely preventable deaths eh turtle?

Here's for thinking before you post. Try it sometime.

And here's another example of you being as usual, wrong. Regulation prevents certain high tech weapons like the F-22 from being exported. This is a very good thing. It ensures American technological superiority on the battlefield.

Molten is correct. We have too much in some places and too little in others. One example of too little was Gringrich and Clinton's repeal of the GSA which is directly responsible for the current recession.
 
Last edited:

obvious Child

Equal Opportunity Hater
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
19,883
Reaction score
5,120
Location
0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
Is someone going to add a poll?
Not sure why we actually need a poll (Beyond being in the poll section). The reasonable, intelligent answer is "Some good, some bad."

Turtledude's opinion that we have too much everywhere is pretty insane when you look at the sheer lack of power the government has over the food industry's capacity to literally sicken and kill every man, woman and child in this country.

And the idea that we have too little everywhere is insane as well.
 

peepnklown

Frankernaut
Joined
Jan 21, 2009
Messages
607
Reaction score
177
Location
California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Well, we are in the poll section so…:mrgreen:
 

CaptainCourtesy

I'm a Jedi Master, Yo
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2006
Messages
156,723
Reaction score
53,491
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Moderator's Warning:
Poll added.
 

Gabriel

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 14, 2010
Messages
1,019
Reaction score
118
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
The complete and utter failure of the economy in the US was directly attributable to lax or non existent regulations. The real problem in the US is that corperations run your government.
 

phattonez

Traditionalist
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 3, 2009
Messages
30,552
Reaction score
4,221
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Easy. Food. The FDA does not have the authority to force a company to recall tainted food or even publicly announce without the company's permission. The government can force a company to take back a dangerous non-food product and announce that publicly, but a food producer, like the big egg farm that tainted hundreds of millions of eggs with salmonella last month has the right to ignore the FDA and sell potentially lethal food products. The only real thing the FDA can do is pull its inspectors, effectively shutting down a plant. That does not stop the containmented food products that have already been shipped from being sold.
That's not even a good example. Those eggs weren't that bad. Everyone had the information, made a big deal about it, and threw the eggs out. The food was still safe if you just scrambled the eggs! That's really not that much of a problem.

The fact that the government can make a company recall slightly defective cribs that may accidentally kill 1 infant out of 1 million but cannot force a recall of food which can (and has) sickened and killed millions and hundreds is frightening. I want the FDA to have the power to force food producers to recall e-coli laced meat. Especially consider the type of e-coli out there. The kind that produces shiga toxins which literally liquefy your organs.
What kind of producer is going to keep making that and have the ability to stay in business?

And here's another example of you being as usual, wrong. Regulation prevents certain high tech weapons like the F-22 from being exported. This is a very good thing. It ensures American technological superiority on the battlefield.
Isn't that kind of stretching the definition of regulation? I thought that was just part of the deal that the military makes with defense contractors.

Molten is correct. We have too much in some places and too little in others. One example of too little was Gringrich and Clinton's repeal of the GSA which is directly responsible for the current recession.
I foresee a "what started the recession" thread, complete with CRA, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, Federal Reserve, Bush, etc.
 

ricksfolly

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 28, 2009
Messages
2,236
Reaction score
232
Location
Grand Junction, CO 81506
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
The complete and utter failure of the economy in the US was directly attributable to lax or non existent regulations. The real problem in the US is that corperations run your government.
You can't allow corporations to have free reign, but you can't squeeze them either. The solution is to random check on them enough times to keep them guessing.

ricksfolly
 

obvious Child

Equal Opportunity Hater
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
19,883
Reaction score
5,120
Location
0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
That's not even a good example. Those eggs weren't that bad. Everyone had the information, made a big deal about it, and threw the eggs out. The food was still safe if you just scrambled the eggs! That's really not that much of a problem.
What makes you think that allowing that to even occur is justifiable? So it didn't turn out as bad as it could have. That doesn't mean we do nothing or even reduce oversight a Turtledude argues.

What kind of producer is going to keep making that and have the ability to stay in business?
Every large meat producer. And they've been doing it for at least two decades this way. You should read Fast Food Nation. Jack in the Box almost went under for using that meat. And their supplier still exists.

Isn't that kind of stretching the definition of regulation? I thought that was just part of the deal that the military makes with defense contractors.
Not at all. An agreement which explicitly forbids you from selling certain products to certain people is regulation. It being part of the contract deal is a sign it is a form of regulation. In fact, that is a poster child of regulation. Government telling you what you can't sell and who you can't sell it to.

I foresee a "what started the recession" thread, complete with CRA, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, Federal Reserve, Bush, etc.
And like most, it will go badly because most people have no understanding of what occurred other then what pundits tell them. Still, fundamentally the problem was over use of leverage across the system. There's no way that could have continued indefinitely.
 

Mensch

Mr. Professional
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2010
Messages
3,715
Reaction score
751
Location
Northern Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
It's interesting to note that the majority of American citizens would actually respond that there is too much government in our daily lives, but when pressed on certain issues, the majority refuse to disenfranchise the various levels of government control. Hence, the unaltering status-quo.
 

Korimyr the Rat

Baby Eating Monster
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 1, 2006
Messages
19,553
Reaction score
15,756
Location
Cheyenne, WY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
That's because, fundamentally, the people do not want less government. They want less government in their lives and more in their neighbors'.
 

Mensch

Mr. Professional
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2010
Messages
3,715
Reaction score
751
Location
Northern Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
That's because, fundamentally, the people do not want less government. They want less government in their lives and more in their neighbors'.
I agree. And you? What does a fascist want? Do you want your political minions to control my thoughts and my own personal behavior?
 

Korimyr the Rat

Baby Eating Monster
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 1, 2006
Messages
19,553
Reaction score
15,756
Location
Cheyenne, WY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
I agree. And you? What does a fascist want? Do you want your political minions to control my thoughts and my own personal behavior?
You should be free to make your own choices as long as you choose to do what I think is best.

And yes, that is precisely what I want the State to do. In the absence of firm moral leadership, society regresses toward an ever-degenerating least common denominator, a trend which is easily observed in our decadent society and its mass media. Liberal political philosophies seek to undermine the moral authority of government, reducing it to little more than a harried traffic cop without the resources to achieve the meager goals with which it has been tasked. All forms of liberalism and libertarianism are fundamentally immoral and anti-human, and it is these influences within society that the Fascist rightfully struggles against.
 

phattonez

Traditionalist
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 3, 2009
Messages
30,552
Reaction score
4,221
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
What makes you think that allowing that to even occur is justifiable? So it didn't turn out as bad as it could have. That doesn't mean we do nothing or even reduce oversight a Turtledude argues.
And it will never occur with the FDA?

Every large meat producer. And they've been doing it for at least two decades this way. You should read Fast Food Nation. Jack in the Box almost went under for using that meat. And their supplier still exists.
I've never gotten sick from Jack in the Box food, and nobody has for a while now.

Not at all. An agreement which explicitly forbids you from selling certain products to certain people is regulation. It being part of the contract deal is a sign it is a form of regulation. In fact, that is a poster child of regulation. Government telling you what you can't sell and who you can't sell it to.
Then I can regulate by writing a contract that forces someone to keep my secret? It's kind of a broad definition of regulation and typically not the thing that free market economists complain about.

And like most, it will go badly because most people have no understanding of what occurred other then what pundits tell them. Still, fundamentally the problem was over use of leverage across the system. There's no way that could have continued indefinitely.
It was inevitable, for quite a few reasons.
 

obvious Child

Equal Opportunity Hater
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
19,883
Reaction score
5,120
Location
0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
And it will never occur with the FDA?
Of course it will. But the FDA has no right to force a recall. That's totally screwed up. They can force a recall of dangerous paints that over time may cause cancer but they cannot force a recall of tainted ecoli ground beef which has proven to be a known killer. That makes no sense.

I've never gotten sick from Jack in the Box food, and nobody has for a while now.
That you know of. Kind of a big assumption that you not hearing anything = nothing happened. Especially considering the level of food poisoning that occurs yearly in this country. But fast food has done a good job of fixing its supply chain. Grocery stores are another matter entirely. And the FDA and other regulatory agencies cannot force them to recall potentially lethal food items.

Then I can regulate by writing a contract that forces someone to keep my secret? It's kind of a broad definition of regulation and typically not the thing that free market economists complain about.
That does nothing to argue it's not regulation. And since Turtledude made the truly asinine argument (one of his many asinine arguments) that there is too much everywhere, he has argued there's too much in export restrictions of military hardware. Is he wrong? Of course. But that's hardly news.

The government has the right to force Ford to recall dangerous vehicles that in the right condition may cause minor injury. But it cannot force a meat producer to recall tainted meat harboring shiga toxin producing ecoli. That makes absolutely no sense. Chance of slight injury is more important then having your organs liquefied. :roll:
 
Top Bottom